I see a number of threads where someone states that they are a "partial-preterist." I wonder if someone can help me understand the difference between partial preterism and full preterism? Is partial preterism a somewhat fluid term, meaning different things to different people? Is there a semi-standard definition?

__________________
Mike Shingler
Pastor: Steep Hollow Baptist Church (SBC)
Bryan, TX

lots of info here-

http://www.preteristsite.com/faq.html

I'm a Partial Preterist btw, a better term is orthodox preterist! (I used to be hard core dispensational!)

__________________
Adam Leavelle
Westminster OPC
Roaring Spring Pa.

http://www.myspace.com/aleavelle
"Speak wisdom to a fool and he'll think you have no sense at all"

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

I believe that Preterists understand all of biblical prophecy to have already been fulfilled, while Partial-Preterists believe that some of it was fulfilled in 70 AD but not all.

__________________
DAVIDIVS DOCTVS VTRIVSQVE LINGVAE
Husband of Emilia
Member: First Reformed Presbyterian Church of Durham (RPCNA) - Durham, NC
Currently in the process of transferring membership to an as-yet-undecided church in Chapel Hill
Student: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, German Literature and Classics

I object to the terms 'partial' and 'full' preterist. 'Orthodox' and 'Unorthodox' would be better.

The hyper-preterist (unorthodox) would love for us to call him 'full' preterist because that makes him sound more consistant than the orthodox preterist. Every we time we refer to the unorthodox view as 'full' or or the orthodox view as 'partial' we are playing right into their hands.

__________________


http://www.villagecommunitychurch.org/

He also wanted to know what the groups believe.

__________________
DAVIDIVS DOCTVS VTRIVSQVE LINGVAE
Husband of Emilia
Member: First Reformed Presbyterian Church of Durham (RPCNA) - Durham, NC
Currently in the process of transferring membership to an as-yet-undecided church in Chapel Hill
Student: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, German Literature and Classics

So is there any essential difference between "full-preterist" and "hyper-preterist", other than the obvious difference in the connotations of the 2 terms?

__________________
Mike Shingler
Pastor: Steep Hollow Baptist Church (SBC)
Bryan, TX

Not that I know of. You can check out a number of past threads but it appears that the one thing that makes the hp 'hyper' is the assertion that the resurrection has already passed.

__________________


http://www.villagecommunitychurch.org/

That helps me out. I was thinking in 3 different categories - partial, full, hyper.
Now, would it be fair to say that there are different "levels" of partial-preterism? (Think, maybe, Kim Riddlebarger vs. Gary DeMar.) Or, would Riddlebarger not be considered even partial-preterist?

__________________
Mike Shingler
Pastor: Steep Hollow Baptist Church (SBC)
Bryan, TX

Partial-Preterist checking in for duty.

Orthodox-Preterist for KMK

__________________
Benjamin P. Glaser
Pittsburgh, PA
Fairmount ARP Church, Sewickley, PA
Student of Theology Pittsburgh Theological Seminary & Reformed Presbyterian Theological Seminary

“If the Church could be aroused to a deeper sense of the glory that awaits her, she would enter with a warmer spirit into the struggles that are before her.”-- J.H. Thornwell

I would say yes. I have been surprised by the variety of orthodox positions.

See these recent threads:

Do Some Preterists Believe The Fulness Of The Gentiles Came In Before 70 AD?
What Prevents A Preterist From Becoming Hyper?
Do Some Preterists Believe Any Of The Kingdom Parables Have Already Been Fulfilled?

__________________


http://www.villagecommunitychurch.org/

Orthodox vs. Unorthodox are good prefixes.

The fundamental difference between the two is that the Orthodox affirm that Jesus will come bodily and that the resurrection is of the body, understood as being the physical body you have, much like Christ's self-same body entered the tomb and came out again.

Within Orthodox Preterists there are differences in understanding a division in Mt. 24:36+ to the rest of the discourse, so some may see Mt. 25 as fulfilled in AD 70, but others do not. All, however, agree that Jesus will come again to judge the living and the dead and that the dead shall rise. The "standard" usually revolves around the timing of the "Great Tribulation".

Within the Unorthodox Preterists, they would make a distinction between hyper & full. The hyper seeing everything as past, the church, sacraments, etc., but the later see ongoing significance for the church, sacraments, etc., almost more of an idealist approach on these things and the ongoing fulfillment of "prophecies", at least the nature of the kingdom.

__________________
B.M.D.
Faith Bible Church
NY

Good definitions.

I don't see how an unorthodox preterist could NOT come to the conclusion that the sacraments are past. If we are really resurrected, why baptize in the hope of a future resurrection? If Jesus said, "Do this till I come," and He has indeed come, why partake of the Lord's Supper?

Just another note. BMD's definitions are good but the implications of these conclusions run so deep that it causes the unorthodox preterist to twist nearly all of the NT Scripture. For example, because many preterists argue that Paul was not saved when he wrote his epistles because the resurrection was still future for him.

__________________


http://www.villagecommunitychurch.org/